tv Happening Now FOX News October 30, 2017 8:00am-9:00am PDT
of fox news channel with the debut of two shows. premiering the ingram angle, and a full pride time line up kickoff. >> bill: so martha sat there, shannon sat there, don't get any ideas, all right? >> sandra: noted. >> jon: we begin with a fox news alert on the charges filed in the russia investigation with president terms former campaign chair now indicted and waiting a court appearance. good morning, i am jon scott. >> melissa: big news day this monday. we have a lot to get to. i melissa francis, paul manafort surrendering to the fbi today, set to appear in court less than three hours from now after the federal grand jury indicted him on 12 counts including conspiracy against the u.s. and money laundering in the special counsel investigation into russia meddling in the 2016 election.
>> this was expected. over the last several months if you asked anybody who was following the mueller investigation closely, the one thing they all agreed would probably happen would be that paul manafort would be in indicted, over those months, the number of people in jerome's world that told me that they expected him to be indicted. that is not a surprise. >> melissa: we have also learned of a second case, this is trump aid george papadopoulos making -- investigating the russian meddling in the investigation. john roberts is live with the story, john. >> he was a foreign policy advisor to the trunk campaign that was hired in the spring of 2016, and unpaid position like a lot of these foreign policy advisors that to the campaign brought in. he had suggested to the campaign according to the investigation that he had connections that
could get a meeting with president vladimir putin and donald trump, apparently the campaign had every step rebuffing the entreaties, not sure where he is going to go, but paul manafort is the biggest issue right now as he did service the president's campaign manager for some time. the campaign chairman for about three months' time, wrangling delegates before that. we will not see the president in person until later on today when he does halloween at the white house, but bringing charges against paul manafort and his business associate on twitter. saying "sorry, this was years ago before he was part of the trump campaign, why aren't cricket hillary and the democrats that focus, also no collusion." he was -- with the ukrainian officials, also reportedly under a wiretap after approved by a fisa court, if all of that is
correct, corey lewandowski has a real issue with that as he explained on fox business just a short time ago. listen here. >> if the public reports are true and there was a time where paul manafort was under a fisa warrant before coming to the trump campaign, why isn't the fbi reaching out to me as a campaign manager? never reached out to donald trump and said, you might want to pause and take a look before you bring him on board. they never did that. he was under a fisa warrant before and after his tenure with the campaign, and the fbi never notified the leading presidential candidate for the major republican party race. never notified him of the problem? this is the problem with the fbi, if you ask me. >> democrats are weighing in on the indictment, chuck schumer sang in a statement "the president must not under any circumstances interfere with the special councils work in any way. if he does so, congress must
respond quickly and in a bipartisan way to make sure that the investigation continues." saying that the president has no desire or intention to interfere with what mueller is doing. at the people on the president's legal team feel very good with where they are in terms of the collection of documents that mueller and his team has asked for. they have told us many times that they believe that the investigation will be concluded in short order and will show no collusion on the part of the trump campaign or in part of the president with russia. they feel good about where they are. they believe it is in the president's best interest to allow the investigation to proceed and come to a swift conclusion. we will hear on the record this afternoon from sarah huckabee sanders during her afternoon briefing today. and one announcement out of the white house, we can expect that a choice of the federal treatment will be announced at the white house by the president on thursday.
we -- jerome powell is the leading contender for that, we will see where that goes. >> melissa: interesting, john roberts, thank you. >> jon: for more on the manafort indictment, let's bring in larry sabato, working at the university of virginia. i have been through the indictment, 31 pages of it, looked at it fairly closely, i do not see the name trump anywhere in the indictment. he said that this all happened years ago, does not involve his campaign, is he right? >> well, you are correct that the name of trump is not to mention coming and paul manafort has his own problems, i do not think that anyone would want to be him this morning, but look, we do not know what the mueller team has and what they are going to do, basically they have been pretty bleak proof. i think the leak about the indictments came from the courthouse and not the mueller
team. we will see how it unfolds. the president is convinced that there was no collusion. he feels that pretty strongly. he has pleaded it out. i'm sure that the lawyers have told him to say little. to say as little as possible. if he says as little as possible, and no preemptive pardons, then i'm not going to say that he is free and clear, but in a much better position then he would be otherwise. >> jon: yes, that is not something that you want to have happen, have your former chairman indicted by a special counsel. >> no, it is not a welcome development. you always ask yourself, what does the constellation of offense look like? the best piece of news that is continuing and appears likely to continue is a very strong economy. in short of an unpopular war. even a big scandal will not derail a strong economy. so if that is the ace in your
hand, then do not play the 2. right? >> jon: right. the other intriguing thing is the former trump campaign aide, george papadopoulos has been charged with lying to the fbi. we do not know exactly what this is about, the timing and extent and nature of his relationships and interactions with certain foreign nationals whom he understood to have close connections with the senior russian government officials. it is almost an afterthought here, but is it possible that there is a bigger trouble for the trump campaign there? >> look, there might be, he is 30 years old as i understand, somewhere in that vicinity, so he was under 30 i guess when these things happened. it is hard to believe that he had that much influence or was that senior. and i will be honest with you, this is no cut to him, but it is a cut to me.
i never heard of him before the indictment was announced today. lying to the fbi is never a good thing. if you are in trouble, the first thing that your lawyer tells you is, don't say anything at all, or whatever you do, don't lie to the fbi. that is really a beginning of deep trouble for anybody. but obviously he has played "guilty." we will see whether that leads anywhere. i do not know. >> jon: the indictment for paul manafort involves money-laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent. so it is a long way from there to any collusion with the russians during the course of business in the trump campaign, but there are some troubling new numbers for the president that we wanted to talk about. "the wall street journal" news poll finds his job performance hitting a new low, dropping five percentage points from last month. now at 38% approval, 58% of those surveyed say that they
disapprove of the job that mr. trump has done in office. numbers similar to the fox news poll.put the president's approval rating at 38%, 58% disapproving. are these worrisome numbers, larry? >> they are not good numbers. they really are not paid you want to do whatever you can to increase your positives if you are a president in the first year, because you have a lot of challenges ahead. having said that in having all of us remember what happened to last fall with the poles, let's say two things. the next election is more than a year away. and the next presidential election is three years away. and a thousand things can happen between now and then. and second, we learned that donald trump, whatever his numbers in the polls are, add three, four, five points just as we found out last fall. why is that? a number of trump supporters do
not talk to pollsters, do not want to talk to pollsters, it is called nonresponse bias. and they are hidden trump of voters who will say that they are undecided who are actually supporters. his support level is actually higher than it appears in most polls. does that put them at 50%? no, may be in the low 40s. he got 46% on election day. they have work to do. but they also have time to do it. the economy is very strong. that's what most people look at first. then they get to the other things. the president would help himself if he stopped generating side controversies. those things are just not helpful. anyway, he would be better just issuing a press release daily about the latest good number on the economy. >> jon: one of the issues that is going to come up for this white house, the former senior adviser steve bannon in his push for incumbents, the prospect of
president trump actively campaigning against some of those republicans during the midterms. it turns out that that move is not unprecedented. fdr actually actively campaign against some democrats when he was in the oval office. >> yes, he was very, very angry about congress rejecting his court packing scheme, and doing some other things that he did not like. he took out after some democrats that he felt were insufficiently supportive of him. fdr, as you recall, about the strongest president in the 20th century, elected -- four times, but he utterly failed. he completely failed. he did not purge anybody. >> jon: yes, the bully pulpit, the power of the presidency, and effectively did not work. >> i did not work, and a drain to energy and capital from things that were much more important to fdr's agenda. there is a lesson there for
president trump. steve bannon is outside the white house, and may be not controllable by the president or anybody else, but for the president, there is a lesson in the history provided by franklin roosevelt. >> jon: larry sabato, senator purdue thank you. >> thank you, jon. >> melissa: former trump chairman and a key aide surrendering to the fbi this morning, what is in the 12 count indictment against paul manafort? >> these charges against paul manafort and rick gates suggest that bob mueller has even bigger fish that he is hoping to catch here . watch me. ♪ i've tried lots of things for my joint pain. now? watch me. ♪ think i'd give up showing these guys how it's done? please. real people with active psoriatic arthritis
are changing the way they fight it... they're moving forward with cosentyx®. it's a different kind of targeted biologic. it's proven to help people find less joint pain and clearer skin. don't use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms of an infection. or if you have received a vaccine, or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. with less joint pain, watch me. for less joint pain and clearer skin, ask your rheumatologist about cosentyx.
this is todd hardy. a fitness buff, youth baseball coach-and lung cancer patient. the day i got the diagnosis, i was just shocked. the surgeon in dallas said i needed to have the top left lobe of my lung removed. i wanted to know what my other options were. and i found that at cancer treatment centers of america. at ctca, our experts examine a variety of therapies, treatments and technologies to identify
a plan specifically for each patient. my doctor understood that who i am was just as important as what cancer i had. we talked about options. my doctor told me about a robotic surgery that was less invasive. we have excellent technology that allow us to perform very specialized procedures for patients who have lung disease. at ctca, it's all about what you can do. i feel fantastic now. exploring treatment options is at the heart of how we fight cancer. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more about our treatment options at cancercenter.com/lung. appointments available now. >> jon: a fox news alert, former trump campaign manager slept with a 12 count federal indictment including a conspiracy against the u.s., money laundering, and failure to expose foreign lobbying.
months after the investigation by robert mueller into russian election meddling. former director of national intelligence james clapper said this in a politico podcast. "the russian succeeded beyond their wildest expectations, the first objective was to discontent, discord destruction in our political life. and they have exceeded to a fairly well. they have amplified the polarization and undermined our democratic system." let's bring in the panel on that. joe concha, media reporter for the hill. judith miller, pulitzer prize winning author and fox news contributor. this news had just broke, but there are couple of things, casual observers of the news are going to say, oh, the president's former campaign chairman is indicted, clearly there must be rushing collusion in the trump campaign. that is not in the indictment at all. >> no, it is not.
end of the present and pointed it out. a saying, this is from years ago. this has nothing to do with the campaign. the campaign was 2015-2016. this is far before that. think what you will see is what we have seen over the last year or two and what happens with observers of news, one side will be entrenched and say, nothing to see here, guys, what about hillary clinton, by the way? what chris wallace said on friday which "more evidence of democratic collusion with the russians and there is of republican collusion with the russians." he was pretty respected. into that holds, one side will say, hey, what about hillary? and one will say, a lot more coming behind the mueller indictment. >> jon: what about leaks, and judy? somebody leaked that it was coming before the weekend. >> we are shocked, shocked that there are leaks coming out of washington. come on, a lot of them come from the white house itself, but this -- i cannot believe what
joe is saying, because evidence of collusion, why would hillary clinton collude with the russians to get information out that her to her own campaign? this is ridiculous. it is a distraction and a sideshow. the fact of the matter is we have not only the former campaign manager and the insistent being indicted, but we have a statement and an acknowledgment from george papadopoulos who is apparently a low level about foreign adviser to the president acknowledging that he met with the russian professor who had ties to the kremlin, who was offering him dirt, and he lied about that to the fbi. that is not alleged, that is acknowledged. let's wait to see how the investigation plays out. let's not draw any conclusions until we see how it plays out. but to say that hillary clinton, who is not the president. who was not elected. he was colluding with the campaign to undermine her own campaign does not make sense to
me. >> jon: "the new york times" is reporting that george papadopoulos, the young former trump campaign aide who also has been indicted and entered a "guilty" plea to the fbi, that he supposedly met with the russian professor saying, it was a meeting about moscow giving dirt to the campaign on the hillary clinton campaign. this according to the court documents that just came out. and as reported in "the new york times." i suppose, joe, there could be other, almost certainly are other shoes to drop here. but just the fact that the manafort document is not really involve anything that he did during the campaign, that is what the trump white house, what the campaign is taking pains to point out. >> writes, and i want to commend her duty and to you for
pronouncing papadopoulos correctly. i cannot wait to see the stumbling on that. but what judy said before, the reason why hillary clinton is relevant is because we have proof that the dnc and the campaign paid for by a foreign national in am i six to get information from the russians. and anybody who is a trump supporter will say that that is far worse than what we are seeing with paul manafort. i do not think it is so ridiculous. i guess she is not president, but the arguing can be made that there is more evidence of democrats working with russians than republicans working with russians at this point. >> jon: judy, the fact that we are still talking about russian meddling and who did what, seven months after the president took office illustrates james clapper's point. at the russians want to so discontent among americans with how out the electoral process works. >> that is aided and abetted by
the white house itself, and by president trump's synonymy of tweets trying to distract the american people from the real failure of getting any part of his agenda through, and we will see what happens with the tax bill. he has lots of democratic buy in on that. but i think that there is another aspect of what has happened so far with the manafort indictment, and that makes a very, very hard for donald trump to fire robert mueller, which is something that was rumored in washington that he was contemplating. it also makes a very hard for the president to pardon paul manafort, because both of those would smack of obstruction of justice. it is a political redline that the president is going to cross, or may not. who knows what donald trump will do? but it makes it harder for him to do that. >> it was rumored that he would fire mueller, but he said on the
record that that was not going to happen. >> jon: joe concha, judy miller, thank you both. >> melissa: nfl protest reach eight a boiling point after controversial comments from one team owner. freedom has made america exceptional, but it can only last if you and i choose to act as people of character. forging character has been the pursuit of hillsdale college since 1844. ♪
>> jon: justin, the tensions are raising between nfl owners and players after this. about 40 of the houston texans took a knee during the national anthem before yesterday's game with the seattle seahawks, now with a meeting between teammates and owners, it has been canceled. live from the los angeles bureau with what led up to this.
william. >> the controversy is about a comment, eight words made two weeks ago by bob mcnair who owns the houston texans. he said during a closed-door meeting with other owners, we cannot have the inmates running the prison. a majority of employers said that he was referring to them as inmates, and 40 of them knelt during the national anthem and protest and explained why after the game. >> we came together as a team, wanted to send a message. and that's what we decided to do. i stand by my brothers to do that. >> a lot of emotions for our team. but just a huge sense of unity. we all felt it coming out and playing for each other. and that was it. >> by the 80-year-old mcnair says that is not what he meant. he apologized publicly and directly to the team for number one, using a figure of speech i was never meant to be taken
literally. and two, that was not directed at the team. "i was not referring to our players when i made a very regretful comment during the owners meetings last week. i was referring to the relationship between the legal office and team owners and how they have been making significant, strategic, strategic dispensations affecting the league without adequate info from ownership over the past two years." he is not alone, cowboys owner jerry jones is reportedly not happy with roger caddell's handling of the national anthem controversy, the ray rice affair, and to the two teams in los angeles, so the question is, do you believe mcnair story? and is what he said so offensive that he should be punished as called for by jesse jackson. the player say the episode is not over. back to you. >> jon: we will continue watching this controversy. thank you. >> melissa: the push protects are formed by some democrats, why they say that they are being
look how beautiful it is... honey, we need to talk. we do? i took the trash out. i know - and thank you so much for that. i think we should get a medicare supplement insurance plan. right now? whether you're new to medicare or not, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. it's up to you to pay the difference. so think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. i did a little research. with a medicare supplement plan, you'll be able to stay with your doctor... oh you know i love that guy. mmmmhmmm. these types of plans let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. and, there are no networks.
is this a one-size fits all kind of thing? no. there are lots of plan options. it all depends on what we need. and how much we want to spend. call now to request your free [decision guide]. it could help you find an aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. what happens when we travel? the plans go with us. anywhere in the country. i like that. you know what else? unitedhealthcare insurance company has years and years of experience. what do you say? i'm in. join the millions already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance... plans endorsed by aarp. remember, all medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could really save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose your own doctor or hospital as long as they accept medicare patients. and with these plans, there could be low or no copays. you do your push-ups today? prepare to be amazed.
>> jon: right now there is a new fallout from the deadly ambush against u.s. soldiers and niger. james mattis and rex tillerson getting ready to testify before rex tillerson announced that they pledged $60 million more. lucas tomlinson live at the pentagon with more for us. >> the senate foreign relations committee gets underway at 5:00 p.m. eastern time where lawmakers will be demanding to know why it took two full days to recover the body of lead david johnson after the ambush. the panic got pushed -- the pentagon pushed back saying he was never left from behind. >> getting it wrong on the niger
ambush? >> i think the thing that we got wrong was that we abandon one of our soldiers. as the chairman said, there was always someone looking for sergeant johnson. >> defense worker terry said that no troops were left from behind. in saying that to the nigerian horses were always looking for johnson and feared that he had been taken captive. he was found by nigerian forces. that was minutes after the attack, but too late to spot the 50 heavily armed militants approaching the special forces team returning to niger on october 4th. they want to know why it took two hours per french sheds to appear overhead and why it took an hour for them to call to them. u.s. forces have complained about the lack of air assets. the subject of the hearing is to review the pentagon's authority to strike terror groups giving authorization after the 9/11 attacks. but since antero groups like isis have emerged, and a global
war spread beyond al qaeda, the u.s. dropped bombs in six different countries. the pentagon has also pushed back on any restraint of the forces based on time or geography, something some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seek today. >> jon: lucas tomlinson, it is a global war on terror for a reason. >> melissa: textile form with one democratic senator saying that she wants to be involved in the overhaul, but that members of her party are being left out. >> i want to work with them, if we can make this about the middle class and make that it's not trickle down, but delivered to the middle class and small businesses, then i think that they could get a bipartisan vote on this and that would be so much better for the country. >> melissa: joining us now, richard fowler, talk radio show host. we also have gianno caldwell.
strategic consulting and a fox news politico analyst. thank you for joining me. starts with what claire mccaskill has had. i want to focus on what is new this morning, and what are the points that are up for negotiation as we talk today. she was focused on the pass-through tax that lowers taxes on people that own small businesses. if you have a family owned business or you have a real estate brokerage or something like that, lowering your taxes so that you can create more jobs. she think that is a tax on millionaires and billionaires, what do you think? >> she brings up a good point, how important it is for democrats and republicans to work together to get the tax reform done. the last time we have seen it done was 1986, that bill was introduced by a democrat in the house of representatives, signed by ronald reagan the following year that october. if we are going to get real, true, lasting tax reform, it has to be a bipartisan effort. it cannot happen overnight.
in 1986, democrats introduced into the house that december, ronald reagan did not sign it until the following october. it was almost a ten and 11 month time frame to get it done. >> melissa: it could take some time. if democrats want to get involved, the talking point that we are hearing from them this morning and yesterday has to do with the pass-through tax, is that the thing they want killed? >> you know what, democrats have flip-flopped on the issue more times than gucci sandals at the pride parade. it is really difficult to hear them talk about issues like this, tax reform or any legislative issue, during obamacare, they did not allow republicans into negotiate. nancy pelosi said, if you want to know what is in the bill, we have to pass it first. when i hear these things that i consider to be complete and total lies, because we know that in new york states, democrats and republicans are working together on issues like the
property tax, there are compromises that are moving forward. republicans and democrats are talking about it. for her to complain only because she wants to get involved, because she knows that trump won her state. and she wants to say, work with republicans, and we know that tax reform is going to get done anyway. if this is why i believe like claire mccaskill is speaking up. >> melissa: for the record, gucci sandals at the pride parade was not appropriate. let's not do that again. let's talk about the second point and focus, and it has to do with this idea. bill hemmer asked peter king today about the idea that it looks like some folks are getting their taxes raised through the tax cuts coming into that is not really the republican thing to do. peter king said that he would not vote for a bill that raised taxes on his constituents. obviously they are talking about the deductions for state and local taxes, what do you think about that? >> this is the hard part of the
bill. you have peter king living in new york, also republicans from maryland, republicans from california who are in a really tough position. when you get rid of the state and local tax deduction, it is going to hurt their constituents, they have a higher local states rate. to add to that's coming you have new moves by paul ryan and others to get rid of the home owner deductions so people who claim their mortgage, interest rate on a deduction on their tax return, they want to take that away. there are a lot of republicans who are very nervous about that in the national building association and the national realtors association saying that this is a big deal. this is what makes tax reform so complicated. working off of the three decade old tax law, when you decide to throw the bath water out, you find that there is a baby in there. if that's what makes it complicated. >> melissa: what makes it complicated, somebody heard the analogy, like taking blood from your right arm and putting it into your left arm prior to the
way that they are trying to keep a revenue neutral. you have to raise taxes on some people. you have to pay for it somewhere else when you're not accounting for the growth that cutting taxes could create. it does seem like some of the taxes are going to go up as a result. that will republicans stand for? >> no, it is not, and i would like to apologize for offending anybody with my reference, but certainly there are folks like you say in new york state which pays about $48 billion more in taxes than what they actually receiving services. are there a lot of folks that have the intention to be disenfranchised. that's why there are people like peter king who said, i'm not going to vote for something that is going to disenfranchise my constituents. as i referenced earlier, with democrats and republicans working together on the particular issue which i believe there are compromises to be made. republicans, of course, we want to make sure that everyone receives a tax break, not just the higher income earners, if
that is a case. but everyone receives some benefit from tax or form as richard mentioned earlier, which has not been done since 1986. that's why it is so important and we have to work together to get it done. i disagree with claire mccaskill. i think democrats and republicans are working together to get it done. >> melissa: it is a lot to do. we have not solved it here. hopefully they will solve it in washington. thank you to both of you. >> jon: the first indictments unsealed in the robert mueller investigation. paul manafort, former chairman will soon make his initial appearance in court. >> the government has unmasked a very sophisticated case against him. olay regenerist
lying about a russian conviction. i spoke with glorious evidence -- larry sabato who cited as a bad idea for president trump to tweet about this case. >> we do not know what the mueller team has and what they are going to do. basically they abandon pretty leak proof. i think the leak about these indictments came from the courthouse and not from the mueller team. we will have to see how it unfolds. the president is convinced that there was no collusion. and he feels that very strongly. he has tweeted it out. i'm sure that his lawyers have told him to say little. >> jon: let's bring in a couple of legal experts, richard st. paul, a member of the republican lawyers association, and julian epstein, at the former judiciary and former staffer reform committee. i want to start with you. you know a lot about campaign law. does any of this in the indictment touch on doug trump
campaign itself? >> no, it's mostly speaks about manafort's goal of hiding money. he was an adviser to the ukraine government, he got paid by the ukraine government. he tried to put more money in his pocket and hide it from being taxed by the united states. that's what it speaks about. money laundering, hiding the money that he made. crimes against the united states. lying to the irs about money tax evasion. the department of justice, lying to them. and also things dealing with his register as a foreign agent. he was advocating to the u.s. government on behalf of on behalf of the ukrainian government. nothing to do with the trump campaign. >> jon: worth pointing out, you are interested -- innocent until proven guilty, that is one of the things that separates us from the judicial systems in places like russia. from your standpoint, you have been a long time, from your standpoint, is there anything in the indictment that reflects
badly on the campaign, on the trump campaign itself or the current white house? >> two counts in the indictment that made -- false statements made about the general relation with ukrainians and russians. he would have to dig a little bit deeper there. i think that your guess is correct, there is nothing here that squarely goes at the question of collusion. i think that the question here is whether robert mueller will try to get manafort to be a cooperating witness. he was at the famous june 2016 meeting that was organized by donald trump jr. where donald trump jr. clearly believe that he was getting information from an attorney that was coordinating with the russian government. information that was damaging to hillary clinton. so that is an important data points. another important data point with a lot of news reports saying that paul manafort was instrumental in changing the
g.o.p. platform to be favorable to the russians in the july 2016 convention. a third data point is paul manafort clearly has a lot of knowledge about donald trump donald trump's -- president trump's financial relationships, alleged relationships with the russians that are getting more and more scrutiny. so the question is, while the indictment is not squarely -- the indictment does not squarely go to the issue of collusion, can paul manafort to be a productive witness for mueller on some of these other question questions? >> jon: every campaign, richard, gets involved in opposition research, you know, everybody essentially does eight. the question in the trump campaign, or the question of the trump campaign is is it illegal to go to the russian government or to invite to the russian government to provide opposition research? >> and that is the particular question that we do not know the
answer to at this point in time. title 18 of the united states code, the criminal section for the federal government, there is no collusion. we have to look at the white-collar crimes like money laundering. did you pay people -- did foreign governments pay people of the united states? did they donate money to political campaigns? you cannot be a foreign agent and political -- donate to a political payment campaign in the united states if you are a foreign entity. so paul manafort is one of many pieces that we will see come together under the mueller investigation. but as it stands now, the charges against manafort have nothing to do with the campaign. it does not bring us any closer to collusion. >> jon: what about the point that they may be using the charges as a cudgel to try to get some operation from paul manafort? >> that is what the feds do in any type of cases. cases that i've handled, you try to get a cooperating witness
part of that is standard procedure. he has a small aspect in terms of something larger here. we do not have anything to show that there was collusion between the trump campaign and the russians at this point in time. it will be a longer investigation before that even if it comes out at all. >> can i touch on a couple of points? we do have some evidence of collusion saying that donald trump jr. was willing to meet with people from the russian government. but you cannot take help from a foreign hostile government as a campaign in a federal campaign because of campaign finance laws. that is considered a contribution. you have that issue. and the techniques that were used by the russians in this case involves cyber crimes. illegal hacking of computer systems. probably another half a dozen laws that were violated in the process of the russian campaign to interfere in the u.s. election. so there are clearly serious
federal criminal statutes involved. there is truth that it is not improving whether the trump campaign was actively collaborating with in the violation of any federal statutes. but there is no question that there is serious criminal violations that occurred on part of russian activities. >> jon: we know that the russians wanted to discord, and they have done that. julian epstein, richard st. paul, we will check in with you again. thank you both. speak to north korea dialing back on missile launches after months of escalating tensions. the warning from washington and the allies ahead of president trump's fidgeted the women could visit to asia ♪
if you're on medicare, and ready to be done with complicated, turn to unitedhealthcare and our medicare advantage plans... like aarp medicarecomplete. these plans can combine your hospital and doctor coverage, with prescription drug coverage and more, all in one plan for a low, or even no, monthly premium. so call now.lan for a low, or even no, monthly premium. so call now. we can answer your questions, even help you enroll. i deserve to get the most out of my plan. we'll make sure your doctors are all connected, you know what your copays are... and you can save on prescriptions; plan members saved an average of over 5000 dollars last year. medicare open enrollment ends december 7th. if you're done with complicated, if you're doso done... complicated, so done... call now to enroll in a plan from unitedhealthcare, like aarp medicarecomplete. [sfx: mnemonic] >> coming up on "outnumbered," more reaction for the
indictment. end of the business associate in the russian probe. to this as some questions special counsel robert mueller's accountability when it comes to leading the probe. >> harris: and lawmakers saying that the former dnc chief need to come back to capitol hill for more questioning. this after they told lawmakers they knew nothing about millions of dollars in payments towards the trump-russian dossier, will anybody be held responsible? speak for all of that plus #oneluckyguy, it is "outnumbered" at the top of the hour. speak to new information in the pacific, sending a stealth bomber to the region ahead of president trump's visit to asia this week. as north korea dials back on missile launches. >> we will have no choice but to totally destroy north korea. rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself. >> melissa: let's bring in security studies assistant
professor at georgetown university. and jean kilpatrick, scholar at the american institute. thank you for joining us. where do we stand in the situation right now? >> what we are seeing from the north korean side is a temporary halting of the provocation. they have not done anything in a little bit. but i think it is too early for the united states to declare victory. the honest truth is this cycle of publication where the united states counters, we have seen this cycle across the decade. at this time it was a little bit different and harrowing, because it was a little bit more intense part of the personality is on both sides, kim jong un along with president trump are more -- >> melissa: hearing reports of blackout drills and evacuation drills and north korea, susan rice had said a while ago that she believes that we almost need to accept and tolerate the idea of a nuclear north korea, what is your take on that? >> i think that it is dangerous
to say that we will not accept a nuclear north korea. my statement would be that kim jong un finds himself between a rock and a hard place and that the united states might launch some action against him. that could lead to a miscalculation in a major war that could be avoided. even if that is the policy. and it is a smart thing for the government to be pursuing saying that they are hopeful in the future to get negotiations. but i am not that optimistic. >> melissa: not a lot of optimism on that front. we have a lot of breaking news today, but thank you. >> jon: while we await paul manafort's first court appearance on charges of conspiracy and money laundering, there are new questions about special counsel robert mueller and what he might have known about the iranian deal, we have details on that next.
>> busy monday. >> lots of news happening and more to come. >> thanks for joining us. >> "outnumbered" starts right now. >> sandra: fox news alert, president trump's former campaign chairman paul manafort and his business associate rick gates both turning themselves in to the fbi today, expected to make an initial appearance at a district court in the next hour. the indictment unsealed contains 12 counts including conspiracy against the united states. this is "outnumbered," i am sandra smith. here today, harris faulkner. the editor of townhall.com katie pavlich is here. ghost of kennedy on fox business, kennedy. and today's #oneluckyguy, also from fb and after the bell and host of fox david. what has turned out to be a busy week. good to have you here. >> thank you for allowing me to be here. >> sandra: knew details coming in on the first